Multiple choice

Directions: Go through the problem and encircle the most appropriate answer.

An occupier is liable to a trespasser in respect of some willful act intended to cause harm or done with reckless disregard. Sakalchand, the owner of a warehouse, got the fence electrified on account of his legitimate fear of dacoity. There was a clear warning about the electrified fencing. There was a playground nearby wherein the children had been playing over a period of time. One day, the cricket ball of the children went into the fence and a child running after the ball touched the fence inadvertently. The child suffered from the shock. The parents of the child field a suit against Sakalchand.

  1. Sakalchand will not be liable, because the child was a trespasser.

  2. Sakalchand will not be liable, because his fencing was legitimate.

  3. Sakalchand will be liable, because he must have taken note of the adjacent playground.
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
C Correct answer
Explanation

An occupier owes a duty to trespassers not to cause intentional harm or act with reckless disregard. While Sakalchand had legitimate security concerns and posted warnings, he failed to consider the adjacent playground where children regularly played. Creating a deadly hazard (electrified fence) in an area where children are known to be present constitutes reckless disregard for trespasser safety, making him liable.

Keep practicing — related questions